Epistemology - created from Mind Map

Página 1

What is knowledge

Propositional

Know how

Acquintance

To know that X

When do we "know that"?

I know that 2+2=4

Tripartite definition

What is it?

What's wrong with it

Justified true belief is necessary and sufficient for knowledge

Justified - a proposition which has good reason to be supported

True - a proposition which is factually correct

Belief - a proposition which one agrees with

Necessary - something which is needed to have something else

Sufficient - if one has one thing one must have a second

"necessary and sufficient"

X is necessary for Y, to have Y one must have X

Eggs are a necessary ingredient for an omelette

However if one has X they may not have Y

X is sufficient for Y, if one has X one must have Y

Being a mother is sufficient for being female

Each condition is individually necessary

All conditions are jointly sufficient

Every condition must be present to have knowledge

If all conditions are present then so is knowledge

Issues with individual necessity

Issues with join sufficiency

Belief

Justification

truth

Can you have knowledge without one of the conditions?

If one gives a correct statement without believing it did they know it?

Weak attack

You ask someone when Queen vic died, they say 1901, you would say that they knew it but they actually guessed, they didn't believe it

Was this knowledge without belief

No

The individual would not claim to have knowledge of this, "i knew when queen vic died" is not a fair statement, it was a coincidence

If you make a true claim without justification is it knowledge?

Somewhat effective

In a multiple choice exam 100 people get a question right. Is the proposition that "I know 100 people knew the answer" fair?

No

It is plausible at least one guessed and did not know (see belief)

While colloquially one may claim this logically it is not fair

Therefore 100 people got it right, but that doesn't mean 100 people knew

Can you know something without it being true?

Highly effective

A colour blind person buys purple shorts

Is it fair for them to say: "I know the shorts are blue"

Yes

No one would knowingly hold a false belief so therefore if the person thinks it is true, it is fair for them to claim that they know it

Aposteriori knowledge is not objectively verifiable, the best possible verification is consensus, but the majority of the world believe in a God, that doesn't make said Gods existence true

Therefore, either:

Truth is a redundant condition for knowledge

We can never claim to know anything aposteriori

This is counter intuitive, when we make claim to propositional knowledge we are providing a state of affairs in the world, if such state of affairs is incorrect what is the point in providing it, knowledge itself becomes a redundant concept and certainly does not fit lsemnatic use

Can you have all the conditions but not knowledge?

Gettier problems

Classic

Twin

Clock

Therefore, JTB=/=K

Smith and Jones both apply for a job, the boss tells S that J will get the job.

S sees J put 10 coins in his pocket

S forms the belief that the man with 10 coins in his pocket will get the job

This is justified by the previous 2

He believes it

S gets the job and finds 10 coins in his pocket

It's now true

Is it fair to say he knew the man with 10 coins would get the job?

He has JTB so it should

No

The implication is that he assumed J would get it so he didn't know

However

The justification is actually unfounded, there is no good reason that the money leads to the job

You go to visit a friend

As you approach the house you see a figure identical to your friend

Justification

you form the belief your friend is in the house

Your friend is upstairs, you are looking at the twin

Truth

Did you know they were home?

No

We have JTB without K

Using counterfactuals if they weren't home according to JTB you would still "know" they were home (see issues with truth"

You are going through a train station and the clock reads 6.05

You form the belief that it is 6.05

The clock is broken

It is 6.05

did you know it was 6.05?

No counterfactually you did not

We have JTB without K

The problem is rooted in justification, this can be strengthened

Infallibilism

No false lemmas

Epistemic virtues

A person is only justified in belief "that p" if they cannot be mistaken about p

Pros

Cons

we are not infallible about other people, time or job offers

Therefore avoids Gettier problems

There's very little we are infallible about beyond our own consciousness

Therefore we know nothing about the outside world

Therefore, using demon doubt one has entailed solipsism

While not logically problematic this is certainly not what we mean by knowing p

Justification cannot be inferred from a falsehood

This resolves the gettier problems

Is relient on hindsight, we can only determine what we do not know, not what we do know

So, do we assume we know it unless proven otherwise or assume we know nothing

The first doesn't solve Gettier

The second doesn't fit what we mean by know

These are vague but can include open mindedness

be open minded to your friend havig a twin etc.

Again to what degree these should be exercised is unclear and if done to extreme again we a ruling out all knowledge

Also elitist - only some can have k

Knowing how to do X

I know how to ride a bicycle

To have knowledge of X

I know Cambridge